Slip 'n' Slide

Taegan Goddard makes the case for why Bush couldn't create an avalanche on a crumbling snowy cliff with a tuba and a marching band:

Don't Expect a Landslide

As Howard Dean emerges as the front-runner in the Democratic race for president, many Republicans think he's the easiest candidate for President Bush to defeat. The New York Times says "Republicans have been longing for a Bush-Dean matchup," saying Dean's positions "would open the door to a Republican landslide in November." And the Washington Times once again compares Dean to George McGovern who lost 49 states in 1972.

Here's why I expect the presidential race to be close, regardless of the Democratic nominee:

Bush has significantly less support from Democrats than Ronald Reagan did. Even Bill Clinton, hated by so many Republicans, had more friends among members of the opposition party. Without greater support among Democrats, Bush can not win in a landslide.

It's very hard to pull off a landslide when you're not likely to win three of the five largest states. In 2000, Bush wasn't even competitive in California, New York or Illinois. He lost all three states by more than 12 percent. That's 109 electoral votes in just those states.

Finally, nearly every national poll shows the country is more polarized than it has been in decades. As in 2000, we're still very much a 50-50 nation. (See the forthcoming book, The Two Americas by pollster Stan Greenberg.) Indeed, it's been nearly 16 years since any presidential candidate even won a majority of the vote. A blowout of 1972 or 1984 proportions would require an extraordinary set of circumstances that are not present today.

Taken with Atrios' Bush v. Straw (see Aziz' post below) we have two compelling frameworks within which we should move forward -- and boldly forward at that!